Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Kings 7:15
For he cast two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece: and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about.
15. of eighteen cubits high apiece ] The Hebrew says ‘eighteen cubits was the height of one pillar.’ There can be very little doubt that this should be followed by ‘and eighteen cubits was the height of the other pillar.’ But the similarity of the words has caused the scribe to overlook them. And there is a like defect in the other half of this verse. For instead of ‘did compass either of them about’ the original gives ‘did compass the second pillar.’ The whole of the latter passage was no doubt ‘a line of twelve cubits did compass about the one pillar, and a line of twelve cubits the second pillar.’ The A. V. gives the sense, and in a better fashion than by introducing italics to represent the missing words. The full form in similar phrases occurs immediately in 1Ki 7:16-17, and then in 18 there is an omission of one-half the description, just as has happened here.
The first portion of these pillars was 18 cubits = 27 feet high by 12 cubits = 18 feet in circumference. This of itself would make a pillar of disproportionate dimensions, but on the top there were placed chapiters (capitals) of 5 cubits = 7 feet high. Thus the whole height would be 23 cubits or 34 feet. It is said (2Ch 3:15) that the pillars were 35 cubits high. In that case we should have to suppose them raised on bases of 12 cubits, which is out of all proportion. The metal work may have had some stone base to rest on, but that would never have been 18 feet high. It is more reasonable to suppose that the numbers, marked in Hebrew letters, have been misread by the Chronicler. See however the note on 1Ki 6:3 above, with reference to these dimensions.
These pillars were broken up and carried away along with other metal at the time of the Babylonian invasion, see 2Ki 25:13; Jer 52:17, in which latter passage the heights of the pillar and its capital are exactly as here, and in the former there is only a variation in the dimension of the capital, not of the pillar.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
These famous pillars, which were broken in pieces by the Babylonians when they destroyed Jerusalem 2Ki 25:13; Jer 52:17, were probably for ornament, standing by themselves under or in front of the porch. It is certain that the Phoenicians used isolated metal columns as sacred ornaments, so that Hiram would be familiar with such a mode of ornamentation. Eighteen cubits appear to have been the height of the shaft only. Adding the capital 1Ki 7:16, 1Ki 7:19, the entire metal pillar was 27 cubits high; and if it had a stone base of eight cubits, which would not be greatly out of proportion, the height of 35 cubits (52 12 feet, 2Ch 3:15) would have been reached. The height of some of the Persepolitan columns, with which these pillars may be best compared, is 67 feet. The circumference of 12 cubits (18 feet) implies a diameter of about 5 feet 9 inches at the base, which would make the column somewhat heavy in appearance. Egyptian pillars were, however, even thicker in proportion to their height. On the supposition that a portion of the original text has fallen out, this verse has been thus completed: He cast two pillars of brass; eighteen cubits was the height of the one pillar, and eighteen cubits was the height of the other pillar; and a line of twelve cubits compassed the one pillar, and a line of twelve cubits compassed the other pillar.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 15. He cast two pillars – eighteen cubits high] That is, about thirty feet in English measure.
A line of twelve cubits] In circumference. It would be difficult even now to procure a founder who could cast such massive pillars, whether solid or hollow.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
He cast two pillars of brass; of which see 2Ki 25:16,17; Jer 52:21.
Of eighteen cubits high apiece.
Object. They are said to be thirty-five cubits high, 2Ch 3:15.
Answ. That place manifestly speaks of both the pillars; and this of each, or one pillar, as it is in the Hebrew.
Object. But then it should have been thirty-six cubits.
Answ. Either the odd half cubit is swallowed up either in the top of the chapiter, or in the bottom of the basis of each pillar; or it is neglected in the account, as commonly small measures or numbers are.
Line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about; so the diameter was four cubits, which, considering the chapiter of five cubits added to the height of each pillar, 2Ch 3:14, was not unproportionable to the height.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15-22. two pillars of brass ofeighteen cubits highThey were made of the brass (bronze) whichwas taken from the king of Zobah (1Ch18:8). In 2Ch 3:15 they aresaid to have been thirty-five cubits high. There, however, theirjoint lengths are given; whereas here the length of the pillars isgiven separately. Each pillar was seventeen and a half cubits long,which is stated, in round numbers, as eighteen. Their dimensions inEnglish measure are as follows: The pillars without the capitalsmeasured thirty-two and a half feet long, and seven feet diameter;and if hollow, as WHISTON,in his translation of JOSEPHUS,thinks (Jer 52:21), the metalwould be about three and a half inches thick; so that the wholecasting of one pillar must have been from sixteen to twenty tons. Theheight of the capitals was eight and three-fourths feet; and, at thesame thickness of metal, would not weigh less than seven or eighttons each. The nature of the workmanship in the finishing of thesecapitals is described (1Ki7:17-22). The pillars, when set up, would stand forty feet inheight [NAPIER, Metal].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For he cast two pillars of brass, eighteen cubits high apiece,…. In 2Ch 3:15 they are said to be thirty five cubits high, which must be understood of the length or height of them both; and whereas that would allow but seventeen cubits and a half to a pillar, either the round number of eighteen is used, or half a cubit in each may be allowed, either for the base or pedestal into which they were put; or the chapiter at the top of them, into which they might go such a length, and so only what was seen is described:
and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about; that was the circumference of them, and therefore their diameter must be four cubits. Eupolemus, an Heathen writer n speaks of these pillars, but he makes the circuit of them to be but ten cubits; and says they were equal in height with the temple, and stood on the right and left, and were made of brass, and covered with gold, the thickness of a finger.
n Apud Euseb, Praepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 34. p. 450.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The brazen pillars of the porch (compare 2Ch 3:15-17). – He formed the two brazen pillars, which were erected, according to 2Ch 3:15, “before the (temple) house, i.e., in front of the hall of the temple. One was eighteen cubits high, and a thread of twelve cubits surrounded (spanned) the other pillar.” The statement of the height of the one pillar and that of the circumference of the other is to be understood as an abbreviated expression, signifying that the height and thickness mentioned applied to the one as well as to the other, or that they were alike in height and circumference. According to the Chronicles, they were thirty-five cubits long; which many expositors understand as signifying that the length of the two together was thirty-five cubits, so that each one was only 17 1/2 cubits long, for which the full number 18 is substituted in our text. But this mode of reconciling the discrepancy is very improbable, and is hardly in harmony with the words of the Chronicles. The number 35 evidently arose from confounding the numeral letters = 18 with = 35. The correctness of the number 18 is confirmed by 2Ki 25:17 and Jer 52:21. The pillars were hollow, the brass being four finger-breadths in thickness (Jer 52:21); and they were cast in the Jordan valley (1Ki 7:46).
1Ki 7:16 “And he made two capitals ( ), to set them on the heads of the pillars, cast in brass, five cubits the height of the one and of the other capital.” If, on the other hand, in 2Ki 25:17 the height of the capital is said to have been three cubits, this discrepancy cannot be explained on the supposition that the capitals had been reduced two cubits in the course of time; but the statement rests, like the parallel passage in Jer 52:22, upon an error of the text, i.e., upon the substitution of (3) for (5).
1Ki 7:17 “Plait (i.e., ornaments of plait), plait-work and cords (twist, resembling) chain-work, were on the capitals, which were upon the heads of the pillars, seven on the one capital and seven on the other capital.” Consequently this decoration consisted of seven twists arranged as festoons, which were hung round the capitals of the pillars.
1Ki 7:18 “And he made pomegranates, and indeed two rows round about the one twist, to cover the capitals which were upon the head of the pillars; and so he did with the other capital.” In the Masoretic text the words and are confused together, and we must read, as some of the Codd. do, in the first clause for , and in the middle clause for . This is not only required by the sense, but sustained by a comparison with 1Ki 7:19. The relation between the two rows of pomegranates and the plaited work is indeed not precisely defined; but it is generally and correctly assumed, that one row ran round the pillars below the plaited work and the other above, so that the plaited work, which was formed of seven cords plaited together in the form of festoons, was enclosed above and below by the rows of pomegranates. If we compare with this the further statements in 1Ki 7:41, 1Ki 7:42, 2Ch 3:16 and 2Ch 4:12-13, and Jer 52:23, is there more precisely designated , “bowls of the capitals,” from which it is evident that the lower portion of the capitals, to which the braided work was fastened, was rounded in the form of a pitcher or caldron. the number of the pomegranates on the two festoons is given at 400, so that there were 200 on each capital, and consequently each row contained 100 (2Ch 3:16); and according to Jer. ( l.c.) there were 96 , “windwards,” and in all 100 on the braided work round about. , “windwards,” can hardly be taken in any other sense than this: in the direction of the wine, i.e., facing the four quarters of the heavens. This meaning is indisputably sustained by the use of the word , to denote the quarters of the heavens, in statements of the aspect of buildings (Eze 42:16-18), whereas there is no foundation whatever for such meanings as “airwards = uncovered” (Bttcher, Thenius), or hanging freely (Ewald).
(Note: It is hardly necessary to observe, that the expression , to gasp for air, in Jer 2:24; Jer 14:6, does not warrant our giving to the meaning open or uncovered, as Bttcher supposes. But when Thenius follows Bttcher ( Proben, p. 335) in adducing in support of this the fact “ that the tangent, which is drawn to any circle divided into a hundred parts, covers exactly four of these parts, ” the fact rests upon a simple error, inasmuch as any drawing will show that a tangent only touches one point of a circle divided into a hundred parts. And the remark of Bttcher, “ If you describe on the outside of a circle of twelve cubits in circumference a hundred small circles of twelve-hundredths of a cubit in diameter, a tangent drawn thereupon will cover to the eye exactly four small circles, although mathematically it touches only one of them in one point, ” is not correct according to any measurement. For if the tangent touches one of these smaller circles with mathematical exactness, to the eye there will be covered either three or five half circles, or even seven, but never four.)
1Ki 7:19-20 In 1Ki 7:19 and 1Ki 7:20 a second decoration of the capitals of the pillars is mentioned, from which we may see that the rounding with the chain-like plaited work and the pomegranates enclosing it did not cover the capital to the very top, but only the lower portion of it. The decoration of the upper part is described in 1Ki 7:19: “And capitals, which were upon the top of the pillars, were (or, Hiram made) lily-work after the manner of the hall, four cubits.” The lily-work occupied, according to 1Ki 7:20, the upper portion of the capitals, which is here called , as a crown set upon the lower portion. It was lily-work, i.e., sculpture in the form of flowering lilies. The words are obscure. According to Bttcher and Thenius, is intended to indicate the position of the pillars within the hall, so that their capitals sustained the lintel of the doorway. But even if were rendered, within the hall, as it is by Bttcher, it is impossible to see how this meaning could be obtained from the words “capitals upon the head of the pillars lily-work within the hall.” In that case we must at least have “the pillars within the hall;” and would be connected with , instead of being separated from it by . Even if we were to introduce a stop after and take by itself, the expression “in (or at) the hall” would not in itself indicate the position of the pillars in the doorway, to say nothing of the fact that it is only in 1Ki 7:21 that anything is said concerning the position of the pillars. Again, the measurement “four cubits” cannot be understood, as it is by Thenius, as denoting the diameter of the capitals of the pillars; it must rather indicate the measure of the lily-work, that is to say, it affirms that there were four cubits of lily-work on the capitals, which were five cubits high, – in other words, the lily-work covered the four upper cubits of the capitals; from which it still further follows, that the plaited work which formed the decoration of the lower portion of the capitals was only one cubit broad or high. Consequently cannot be understood in any other sense than “in the manner of or according to the hall,” and can only express the thought, that there was lily-work on the capitals of the pillars as there was on the hall. For the vindication of this use of see Ges. Lex. by Dietrich, s.v. .
(Note: This is the way in which the earlier translators appear to have understood it: e.g., lxx ( “ lily-work according to the hall four cubits ” ); Vulg. Capitella… quasi opere lilii fabricata erant in porticu quatuor cubitorum; Chald. ( opus liliaceum collectum in porticu quatuor cubitorum ); Syr. opus liliaceum idem fecit (Syr . wa – ( e kad ke)set[a4wa4) ) in porticu quatuor cubitis. These readings appear to be based upon the view supported by Rashi ( for ): lily-work as it was in the hall.)
There is no valid objection to the inference to which this leads, namely, that on the frontispiece of the temple-hall there was a decoration of lily-work. For since the construction of the hall is not more minutely described, we cannot expect a description of its decorations. – In 1Ki 7:20 a more precise account is given of the position in which the crowns consisting of lily-work were placed on the capitals of this columns, so that this verse is to be regarded as an explanation of 1Ki 7:19: namely, capitals upon the pillars (did he make) also above near the belly, which was on the other side of the plait-work.” , the belly, i.e., the belly-shaped rounding, can only be the rounding of the lower portion of the capitals, which is called in 1Ki 7:41, 1Ki 7:42. Hence ( Keri), “on the other side of the plaited work,” can only mean behind or under the plait, since we cannot suppose that there was a belly-shaped rounding above the caldron-shaped rounding which was covered with plaited work, and between this and the lily-work. The belly-shaped rounding, above or upon which the plaited work lay round about, might, when looked at from without, be described as being on the other side of it, i.e., behind it. In the second half of the verse: “and the pomegranates two hundred in rows round about on the second capital,” the number of the pomegranates placed upon the capitals, which was omitted in 1Ki 7:18, is introduced in a supplementary form.
(Note: Hermann Weiss ( Kostmkunde, i. p. 367) agrees in the main with the idea worked out in the text; but he assumes, on the ground of monumental views, that the decoration was of a much simpler kind, and one by no means out of harmony with the well-known monumental remains of the East. In his opinion, the pillars consisted of “ a shaft nineteen cubits in height, surrounded at the top, exactly after the fashion of the ornamentation of the Egyptian pillars, with seven bands decorated like plaited work, which unitedly covered a cubit, in addition to which there was the lily-work of five cubits in height, i.e., a slender capital rising up in the form of the calyx of a lily, ornamented with pomegranates. ” Our reasons for dissenting from this opinion are given in the exposition of the different verses.)
1Ki 7:21 “And he set up the pillars at the hall of the Holy Place, and set up the right pillar, and called its name Jachin, and … the left… Boaz.” Instead of we have in 2Ch 3:15 , and in 2Ch 3:17 , “before the house,” “before the Holy Place.” This unquestionably implies that the two brazen pillars stood unconnected in front of the hall, on the right and left sides of it, and not within the hall as supporters of the roof. Nevertheless many have decided in favour of the latter view. But of the four arguments used by Thenius in proof that this was the position of the pillars, there is no force whatever in the first, which is founded upon Amo 9:1, unless we assume, as Merz and others do, that the words of the prophet, “Smite the capital, that the thresholds may shake, and break them (the capitals of the pillars), that they may fall upon the head of all,” refer to the temple at Jerusalem, and not, as Thenius and others suppose, to the temple erected at Bethel for the calf-worship. For even if the temple at Bethel had really had a portal supported by pillars, it would by no means follow that the pillars Jachin and Boaz in Solomon’s temple supported the roof of the hall, as it is nowhere stated that the temple of Jeroboam at Bethel was an exact copy of that of Solomon. And even with the only correct interpretation, in which the words of Amos are made to refer to the temple at Jerusalem, the argument founded upon them in support of the position of the pillars as bearers of the hall rests upon the false idea, that the , which are shaken by the smiting of the capital, are the beams lying upon the top of the pillars, or the superliminaria of the hall. It is impossible to prove that has any such meaning. The beam over the entrance, or upon the doorposts, is called in Exo 12:7, Exo 12:22-23, whereas denotes the threshold, i.e., the lower part of the framework of the door, as is evident from Jdg 19:27. The words of the prophet are not to be interpreted architecturally, but to be taken in a rhetorical sense; “so that by the blow, which strikes the capital, and causes the thresholds to tremble, such a blow is intended as shakes the temple in all its joints” (Baur on Amo 9:1). “ , a kind of ornament at the top of the pillars, and , the thresholds, are opposed to one another, to express the thought that the building is to be shaken and destroyed a summo usque ad imum, a capite ad calcem ” (Hengstenberg, Chrisol. i. p. 366 transl.). The other arguments derived from Eze 40:48 and Eze 40:49, and from Josephus, Ant. viii. 3, 4, prove nothing at all. From the words of Josephus, … … , it would only follow “that the pillars (according to the view of Josephus) must have stood in the doorway,” if it were the case that had no other meaning than doorpost, and could be understood as referring to the temple-hall generally. But this is conclusively disproved by the fact that Josephus always calls the temple-hall ( l.c., and viii. 3, 2 and 3), so that can only denote the fore-court, and a pillar standing by itself. Consequently Josephus regarded the pillars Jachin and Boaz as propylaea erected in front of the hall. We must therefore adhere to the view expressed by Bhr ( d. Tempel, p. 35ff.), that these pillars did not support the roof of the temple-hall, but were set up in front of the hall on either side of the entrance. In addition to the words of the text, this conclusion is sustained (1) by the circumstance that the two pillars are not mentioned in connection with the building of the temple and the hall, but are referred to for the first time here in the enumeration of the sacred vessels of the court that were made of brass. “If the pillars had formed an essential part of the construction and had been supporters of the hall, they would certainly have been mentioned in the description of the building, and not have been placed among the articles of furniture” (Schnaase); and moreover they would not have been made of metal like the rest of the vessels, but would have been constructed of the same building materials as the hall and the house, namely, of stone or wood (Bhr). And to this we may add (2) the monumental character of the pillars, which is evident from the names given to them. No architectural portion of the building received a special name.
(Note: Stieglitz ( Gesch. der Baukunst, p. 127) aptly observes in relation to this: “ The architect cannot subscribe to Meyer ‘ s view (that the pillars were supporters of the hall), since it was only through their independent position that the pillars received the solemn character intended to be given to them, and by their dignity subserved the end designed, of exalting the whole building and calling attention to the real purpose of the whole. ” )
Jachin ( ): “he establishes,” stabiliet templum (Simonis Onom. p. 430); and Boaz ( ), ex in illo , sc. Domino, robur (Sim. p. 460). Kimchi has correctly interpreted the first name thus: “Let this temple stand for ever;” and the second, “Solomon desired that God would give it strength and endurance.” The pillars were symbols of the stability and strength, which not only the temple as an outward building, but the kingdom of God in Israel as embodied in the temple, received from the Lord, who had chosen the temple to be His dwelling-place in the midst of His people.
(Note: There is no necessity to refute the fanciful notion of Ewald, that these pillars, “ when they were erected and consecrated, were certainly named after men who were held in estimation at that time, probably after the younger sons of Solomon, ” and that of Thenius, that , “ He (the Lord) establishes with strength, ” was engraved upon them as an inscription.)
1Ki 7:22 In 1Ki 7:22 it is stated again that there was lily-work upon the head of the pillars, – a repetition which may be explained from the significance of this emblem of the capitals of the pillars; and then the words, “So was the work of the capitals finished,” bring the account of this ornament of the temple to a close.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
B. THE BRONZE PILLARS 7:1522
TRANSLATION
(15) And he formed the two bronze pillars, eighteen cubits was the height of one pillar and the circumference of the second pillar was twelve cubits. (16) And two capitals he made to put on top of the pillars, cast of bronze, the height of the one capital was five cubits, and five cubits was the height of the other capital. (17) Nets of network and cords, chainwork, were upon the capitals which were on top of the pillars, seven to one capital and seven to the other. (18) And he made the pomegranates, even two rows round about the one network to cover the capitals that were upon the top of the pillars[197]; and so did he for the other capital. (19) And the capitals which were upon the top of the pillars were of lily-work in the manner of the porch, four cubits. (20) And the capitals upon the two pillars (he made) also above the belly which was on the other side of the network, and the pomegranates were two hundred in rows round about upon the other capital. (21) And he set up the pillars at the porch of the Temple, and set up the right pillar, and called its name Jachin, and he set up the left pillar and called its name Boaz. (22) And upon the top of the pillars he made lily-work; and the work of the pillars was finished.
[197] In this verse it appears that the Hebrew word for pomegranates and pillars have been transposed. Most commentaries follow the order as given in the Septuagint which is also supported by two Hebrew manuscripts.
COMMENTS
Two enormous pillars of bronze are first mentioned as being, no doubt, the most prominent work of Hiram. Each of these two pillars was twenty-seven feet tall not counting the 7 1/2 feet of the capital, but probably including the height of the pedestals. The height of these pillars would thus approximate that of a modern three story building. The pillars were hollow, the metal being four finger breadths thick (Jer. 52:21). The circumference (lit., a line went around) was eighteen feet (1Ki. 7:5). The statement of the height of one pillar and the circumference of the other is to be understood as an abbreviated expression signifying that the two pillars were identical in size.
A problem arises concerning the height of these pillars when one studies the parallel passage in 2Ch. 3:15. The Chronicler gives a figure for the height (?) of the pillars equivalent to 52 feet. It is interesting, however, that Chronicles does not use the Hebrew word for height which is used in Kings (qomah), but the Hebrew word usually translated length (orech). Chronicles may be giving the total length of both pillars minus the pedestals to which they were anchored; Kings may be giving the height of each pillar individually, including the height of the pedestal.[198]
[198] Another possibility is that the actual height of each pillar of 17 1/2 cubits and that Kings has rounded off the figure to eighteen cubits. The 17 1/2 cubits of each pillar combined would yield the thirty-five cubits of 2Ch. 3:15. Most conservative scholars, however, concede that the figure in Chronicles has been corrupted in the course of transmission of the text and should read eighteen cubits as in Kings.
A bronze capital or crown adorned the top of each pillar, These capitals were five cubits high[199] (1Ki. 7:16). The capitals were each elaborately decorated, but it is almost impossible to speculate on what the exact form of these decorations might have been.
[199] 2Ki. 25:7 gives the height as three cubits. This figure is usually regarded as a scribal miscopying.
A row of one hundred (1Ki. 7:20) pomegranates ran around the pillars below the network (chainwork) with a second row of one hundred above. The pomegranates would thus form a double border to the chainwork (1Ki. 7:18). Probably the pomegranate was selected for its beautiful form rather than because of any symbolic import.[200] This fruit was also portrayed in various colors on the hem of the robe of the high priestly ephod (Exo. 28:33-34; Exo. 39:24).
[200] Some have suggested that the pomegranates signified fruitfulness in good works; others, that the fruit was an image of the law or covenant of the Lord, and the seeds symbolic of the separate commands of the law.
1Ki. 7:19 has been taken by some to refer to a second capital which was superimposed on the one which was just described. It is better, however, to regard this verse as further describing the single capital which crowned each pillar. It would seem that the lower part of the capital to which the braided work (network) was fastened, was rounded in the form of a pitcher or caldron.[201] The decoration of the upper part of the capitals consisted of sculpture in the form of flowering lilies. The lily-work covered six feet of the total 7 feet occupied by the capitals. The phrase in the manner of the porch (lit., in the porch) is difficult. Keils interpretation, though not without its difficulties, is perhaps the best, viz., that the lily-work on the capitals resembled some lily-work which, it would appear, was in or on the porch of the Temple.[202]
[201] See 1Ki. 7:41-42; 2Ch. 3:16; 2Ch. 4:12-13; Jer. 52:23.
[202] The construction of this porch is not minutely described, hence there is no other reference to this decorative lily-work.
1Ki. 7:20 should be regarded as a further amplification of 1Ki. 7:19 indicating exactly where the crowns of lily-work were placed on the capitals. The belly (bowl in 1Ki. 7:41) was the rounding of the lower portion of the capitals which was behind or under the plait or network. Two hundred pomegranates were on each capital, one hundred to a row; according to Jer. 52:23 ninety-six of the hundred faced the four quarters, the remaining four occupied the four corners. Thus it would appear that this part of the capital was four-square.
1Ki. 7:21 raises questions about the precise location and function of the two massive bronze pillars. It would appear that they stood within the porch, not in front of it as some have suggested. Whether the pillars were functional or whether they were ornamental is a much discussed question. The following lines of thought suggest that these pillars were ornamental rather than functional.
1. The size of these pillarsover thirty-four feetseems to preclude their being used as supports for the roof.
2. If the pillars had been a functional part of the building, they would almost certainly have been of the same material, i.e., wood or stone. Their metallic composition is certainly an argument for their monumental character.
3. While these columns received special names, no architectural portion of the building was so designated.
4. These two pillars were not mentioned in connection with the building of the Temple and the porch, but are referred to here for the first time in the enumeration of the sacred vessels of the court that were made of bronze.
But if these renowned pillars were ornamental and symbolicand most modern scholars concede that they werewhat religious function did they serve? Some have tried to associate them with the forbidden Canaanite massebhoth, the memorial monoliths which were a regular feature of Canaanite sanctuaries. Others see a connection with the Egyptian solar cult. Still others regard them as fire-altars or incense burners which may have symbolized the wilderness pillar of fire and pillar of cloud, i.e., Gods leadership during the period of the wandering.[203] The first two suggestions can be immediately dismissed as unworthy of the Temple of God. The third suggestion, while not impossible, is improbable in as much as the text gives not the slightest hint that these pillars had any more than a symbolic significance.
[203] A theory originally proposed by Robertson-Smith and recently more or less supported by Albright, ARI, pp. 14448.
The two pillars in the porch before the sanctuary symbolized the power and eternity of the God to whom this sacred building was dedicated. The pillar on the right (south) was called Jachin, i.e., He shall establish, and the pillar on the left, Boaz, i.e., in Him is strength. These pillars thus pointed to God as the true support of His sanctuary, and emphasized as well the stability and strength of the kingdom of God of which the Temple was an outward symbol.
1Ki. 7:22 repeats 1Ki. 7:19 and serves to underscore the significance of the lily-work atop the two pillars. The capitals themselves roughly resembled a full blown lily-cup, and furthermore had representations of the leaf of the lily superimposed upon it. The two pillars would thus resemble two giant plants, the column answering to the stalk, the capital to the flower.[204] The implication of 1Ki. 7:22 is that the columns, capitals and decorations were cast separately, and that when the columns were set up, the work was not finished until the decorations had been affixed.
[204] Hammond, PC, p. 131.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(15-22) With regard to the two pillars, Jachin (He shall establish) and Boaz (In it is strength), the text gives no account of their destination, except that they were set up in the porch of the Temple (1Ki. 7:21). Mr. Fergusson considers that they were supports to the roof of the vestibule; and if this were thirty cubits high, the twenty-seven cubits of each pillar, allowing for the slope of the roof to the apex, would suit well enough. But the absence of all reference to their position as parts of the building, and the entire separation of the description of their fabrication from the account of the building itself, rather favoured the other supposition, that they were isolated pillars set up in front of the porch as symbolic monuments, conveying the idea of Psalms 46, God is our hope and strength; God is in the midst of her, therefore shall she not be removed. It is particularly noticed (2Ki. 25:13-16; Jer. 52:17; Jer. 52:20-23) that they were broken up by the Chaldans. on the capture of Jerusalem, and the brass carried away. The description is exceedingly elaborate, and, except in one or two parts, clear enough. The shaft of each pillar was twenty-seven feet high, and its diameter something less than six feet. Josephus says that it was hollow, but of considerable thickness. Above the shaft was a chapiter (or capital) of great proportionate size (seven and a half feet high), covered with a net-work and festoons of metal-work, and ornamented with two rows of pomegranates, a hundred in each row. Over these again was lily-work of six feet in heightprobably some conventionalised foliage, technically known by that name, like the honeysuckle ornament in classical architecture, or the conventional dog-tooth or ball-flower of Gothic. The whole height, even if there were no base or plinth below, would be twenty-seven cubits, or forty feet and a half. In the Dict. of the Bible (TEMPLE) is given a drawing of a pillar at Persepolis, which bears a considerable resemblance to the general description here given, but, being executed in stone, is far less elaborate in ornamentation. The whole style of the narrative shows that these were regarded as monuments of the highest artistic skill, and well known to all, as from their position they would be constantly before the eyes both of priests and people. There was, so far as can be seen, nothing to correspond to them in the Tabernacle.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
15. He cast Hebrew, Formed or fashioned.
Two pillars of brass “There are no features connected with the temple of Solomon which have given rise to so much controversy, or been so difficult to explain, as the form of the two pillars of brass which were set up in the porch. It has even been supposed that they were not pillars, in the ordinary sense of the term, but obelisks; for this, however, there does not appear to be any authority.” Fergusson. It is doubtless impossible to restore with exact correctness the forms of the pillars, but from the minute description here given, though in some parts obscure, it is not difficult to form an approximate restoration of their principal features,
Eighteen cubits high apiece This is to be understood of the height of the main shaft, not including the capitals and lily work. The thirty-five cubits, mentioned in 2Ch 3:15 as the height of these pillars, is without doubt an error.
Twelve cubits did compass either Literally, the dimensions are thus given: Eighteen cubits was the height of the one pillar, and a line of twelve cubits encircled the second pillar. Thus we have given us the height of one pillar, and the circumference of the other; but this is only an abbreviated form of stating the measurements. These columns were hollow, and the brass was four fingers in thickness. Jer 52:21.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Hiram Fashions The Two Pillars Of Bronze, Yakin and Boaz ( 1Ki 7:15-22 ).
In front of the Temple were to be placed two pillars, which, going by clay models of temples which have been discovered in Palestine and Cyprus (13th-9th centuries BC), and possible examples found elsewhere (e.g. in Hazor, Arad and Kition), would be free standing. This is also confirmed on Sidonian coins. One of the pillars was named Yakin (‘He establishes’), and the other was named Boaz (‘with strength’). We must always beware of just assuming that similarity of construction meant similarity of significance, for even though there may often be common ground in religious symbols, in the end each country imbues its own symbols with its own meaning. And this was moreso with Israel than with any other nation. So we must in this case seek in them some significance which pointed towards the uniqueness of YHWH, for at this time Solomon was undoubtedly still fully focused on the sole worship of YHWH. Possibly in fact the thought is that of a proclamation, ‘He establishes — with strength (the house of David)’. Another remoter possibility is that, with their decoration of blood-red pomegranates and lotus blossoms (an Egyptian symbol of life), they represented the two unique trees in the Garden of Eden, with one acting as a warning against sin and the other offering the possibility of life from YHWH. But the pomegranate was always seen as a sign of fruitfulness, and, alternated with bells, adorned the High Priest’s robe. Thus they are more likely to be giving a positive picture as two witnesses to creation, and to God’s promises to Israel.
Analysis.
a
b And he made two capitals of molten bronze, to set on the tops of the pillars: the height of the one capital was five cubits, and the height of the other capital was five cubits (1Ki 7:16).
c There were nets of checker-work, and wreaths of chain-work, for the capitals which were on the top of the pillars, seven for the one capital, and seven for the other capital (1Ki 7:17).
d So he made the pillars, and there were two rows round about on the one network, to cover the capitals that were on the top of the pillars, and so did he for the other capital. And the capitals that were on the top of the pillars in the porch were of lily-work, four cubits (1Ki 7:18-19).
c And there were capitals above also on the two pillars, close by the belly which was beside the network, and the pomegranates were two hundred, in rows round about on the other capital (1Ki 7:20).
b And he set up the pillars at the porch of the temple. And he set up the right pillar, and called its name Yachin, and he set up the left pillar, and called its name Boaz, and on the top of the pillars was lily-work (1Ki 7:21-22 a.
a So was the work of the pillars finished (1Ki 7:22 b).
Note that in ‘a’ he fashioned the pillars, and in the parallel the pillars were finished. In ‘b’ the heads were set on the top of the pillars, and in ‘b’ the pillars were set up with the tops of the pillars (the heads) being lily-work. In ‘c’ we have a description of decorations on the heads, and in the parallel we have further descriptions of the decorations on the heads. In ‘d’ and centrally we have a summary of the pillars and their heads, with an emphasis on the lily-work (or lotus blossoms). The lily-work or lotus blossoms were clearly seen as important.
1Ki 7:15
‘ For he fashioned the two pillars of bronze, one was eighteen cubits high, and a line of twelve cubits compassed the other about.’
The wording is quaint, referring one measurement to one pillar and another to the other, with both measurements actually applying to both. This may have been with the intention of abbreviating the description, probably because he wanted the emphasis to be on the ‘heads’. The meaning is, however, clear. Each of the two pillars was made of bronze, and each was eighteen cubits (eight metres, twenty seven feet) high, a figure confirmed by 2Ki 24:17. Their circumference is given as twelve cubits. That means that their diameter was about 1Ki 3:8 cubits (just under two metres, or six feet). So they were large and impressive. That they were hollow is apparent from Jer 52:21. In 2Ch 3:15 they are stated to be ‘thirty five cubits high’, but that is almost certainly because the Chronicler was seeking to obtain a multiple of five, the sacred number for both the Tabernacle and the Temple, and accomplished it by giving the height of the two pillars added together. (Half a cubit each may have been seen as lost in putting them into their foundations, or it may simply have been a rounding off in order to obtain a multiple of five).
1Ki 7:16
‘ And he made two capitals of molten bronze, to set on the tops of the pillars: the height of the one capital was five cubits, and the height of the other capital was five cubits.’
On top of each pillar was set a ‘capital’ or ‘crown’ or ‘head’ of molten bronze which was five cubits in height. The same size ‘crown’ or ‘head’ was set on both pillars. The dual emphasis on them in contrast with the pillars, brings out their importance and significance. They were seen as acting as two witnesses.
In 2Ki 25:17, at the time of the destruction of the Temple, they would be said to be three cubits in height. This was probably due to deterioration, followed by repair work carried out during the renovations of Jehoash (2Ki 12:6 ff) and Josiah (2Ki 22:3 ff), which reduced their size.
1Ki 7:17
‘ There were networks of latticework, and wreaths (spirals) of chain-work, for the capitals (heads) which were on the top of the pillars, seven for the one capital, and seven for the other capital.’
Around the ‘crowns’ or ‘heads’ on top of the pillars were wound nets of latticework and wreaths of chain work, presumably to form a kind of decoration. There were seven to each pillar.
1Ki 7:18
‘ So he made the pillars, and there were two rows round about on the one network, to cover the capitals that were on the top of the pomegranates, and so did he for the other capital.’
It is now again emphasised that ‘he made the pillars’, and it would appear that what follows, although in technical language, is intended to indicate that each network of lattice work had two rows of wreaths of chain work which covered the ‘heads’, this being above where the pomegranates (mentioned later) were engraved. And this occurred in both cases. (We must remember that the original listeners as it was read out would have been able to visualise the situation from memory).
1Ki 7:19
‘ And the capitals that were on the top of the pillars in the porch were of lily-work, four cubits.’
Furthermore, with regard to the top four of the five cubits of the heads, there was, as well as the other decorations, engraved lily-work (or lotus blossoms). The limitation would presumably be because the first cubit of the head was covered with the network and wreaths, and with the engraved pomegranates. The emphasis on the lily-work (see also 1Ki 7:22) brings out its importance. In the Song of Solomon (e.g. 1Ki 2:16; 1Ki 6:2-3) the shepherd was seen as ‘feeding among the lilies’ which were a picture of a fruitful and pure Israel, and the beloved herself was seen as like a lily (e.g. 1Ki 2:1-2; 1Ki 4:5; 1Ki 7:2). To go among the lilies was to leave behind the imperfections of city life and to enjoy the God-given freedom of Israel’s countryside. Lilies thus symbolised the purity of all that was best in Israel before it was spoiled by sophistication.
1Ki 7:20
‘ And there were capitals above also on the two pillars, close by the belly (bulbous part) which was beside the network, and the pomegranates were two hundred, in rows round about on the other capital.’
It is now repeated that the two pillars had ‘heads’ above them, and it would appear that the lower part of the heads were in a bulbous shape, with the network and engraved rows of pomegranates going round the heads above (or even on) the bulge. A similar bulbous shape at the lower part of such a ‘head’ has actually been found on free-standing columns at the Temple of Aphrodite in Paphos.
To sum up the picture which has been painstakingly built up (probably so that the hearer could see it being accomplished stage by stage), we have the large, stout pillars of bronze, which lead up to the ‘heads’, with the lower part of the ‘heads’ having a bulge in them. These were then decorated with networks of lattice work and wreaths of chain work, with rows of pomegranates in the first cubit, and lily work (or lotus blossoms) covering all but the first cubit.
1Ki 7:21
‘ And he set up the pillars at the porch of the temple. And he set up the right pillar, and called its name Yakin, and he set up the left pillar, and called its name Boaz.’
Having been made (which was a huge task in itself, comparable with Sennacherib’s mythical beasts cast in bronze) the pillars were then set up at the porch of the Temple, the one being named ‘He Establishes’ (Yakin) and the other being named ‘With Strength’ (Boaz). The verb ‘kun’, from which comes ‘yakin’, features prominently in Nathan’s prophecy concerning the Davidic house (2Sa 7:12-13; 2Sa 7:16, cited in 1Ki 2:24, compare Isa 9:7), where the promise is that the throne of his kingship will be established for ever. (And Boaz was a well known ancestor of David and could stand for the Davidic house). So as already suggested above this may be intended to be an open proclamation that the house of David was ‘established — with strength’ with the help of YHWH. And with their pomegranates and lily-work they may also possibly have been intended as a proclamation of the glory of the Creator, as the Creator of all that was beautiful (lily-work/lotus blossoms) and delightful and good to partake of (pomegranates).
This idea has been extended to suggest that the words yakin and be‘oz are the opening words of well known declarations about YHWH, e.g. ‘He will establish (yakin) the throne of David’ (compare 2 Samuel 13, 16) and ‘in the strength (be‘oz) of YHWH will the king rejoice’ (compare Psa 21:1; Psa 21:13).
Another suggestion which has gained some popularity is that fires were kept alight in one or both of the heads symbolising YHWH’s presence with His people, in the same way as He was present with them in the pillar of fire in the Exodus. There are indications of such pillars having fires in them elsewhere. Herodotus, for example, tells us that one of the pillars before the Temple of Baal in Tyre held a fire which glowed at night, and Hiram came from Tyre.
1Ki 7:22
‘ And on the top of the pillars was lily-work. So was the work of the pillars finished.
The fact that the heads were decorated with lily-work is again emphasised, stressing the connection of the heads with nature (or with lotus blossoms connecting them with life. The word for lily is similar to the Egyptian word for lotus-flower). And with all this the work of the pillars was said to have been brought to completion, a statement which indicates the first break in the passage (see also 1Ki 7:40; 1Ki 7:51, and summary above).
To sum up we may see these two pillars as declaring the glory of the Creator, the purity of the pure in Israel, and as underlining the certainty of YHWH’s everlasting covenant with the house of David.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Ki 7:15. Two pillarsof eighteen cubits high It is said, 2Ch 3:15 that these pillars were thirty and five cubits high, which relates to the height of both of them together without their pedestals, whereas the height of each is given here with its pedestal. These two pillars were called by the names of Jachin and Boaz, 1Ki 7:21 words which imply, that God alone gave stability, or was alone the support and strength of the temple. Various allegorical designations have been given to these pillars. The authors of the Universal History observe, by way of conjecture, that one might suppose there was an inscription in some such sense as that above, given upon the basis of each of the pillars; that on the one beginning with the word Jachin, and that on the other with the word Boaz, from whence the pillars might have their denomination; as we see the books of Moses called by the first words which they begin with. See Universal History, vol. 4: p. 206.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
(15) For he cast two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece: and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about. (16) And he made two chapiters of molten brass, to set upon the tops of the pillars: the height of the one chapiter was five cubits, and the height of the other chapiter was five cubits: (17) And nets of checker work, and wreaths of chain work, for the chapiters which were upon the top of the pillars; seven for the one chapiter, and seven for the other chapiter. (18) And he made the pillars, and two rows round about upon the one network, to cover the chapiters that were upon the top, with pomegranates: and so did he for the other chapiter. (19) And the chapiters that were upon the top of the pillars were of lily work in the porch, four cubits. (20) And the chapiters upon the two pillars had pomegranates also above, over against the belly which was by the network: and the pomegranates were two hundred in rows round about upon the other chapiter. (21) And he set up the pillars in the porch of the temple: and he set up the right pillar, and called the name thereof Jachin: and he set up the left pillar, and called the name thereof Boaz. (22) And upon the top of the pillars was lily work: so was the work of the pillars finished.
We may readily conceive, from the names of Jachin and Boaz, given to those pillars, that their being set up, had a spiritual object in view. They were placed at the entrance of the temple, near the door. And as the name of Jachin signifies a thing fixed; and Boaz implies strength; do not both serve to convey this idea, that when believers in Jesus approach the door of the temple, their souls should be fixed on Him they come to meet and worship, and offer all their poor services in his strength. And there is this more in the view; it is the Lord which will fix and strengthen his people, like Jachin and Boaz, not to be moved.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Ki 7:15 For he cast two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece: and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about.
Ver. 15. Of eighteen cubits high apiece. ] Thirty-five cubits high, saith another prophet, 2Ch 3:15 that is, saith Pellican, both of them together were thirty-five cubits high, and each one almost eighteen, for which it is said to be eighteen cubits; the Scripture useth not to express such broken measures.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
cast. Hebrew fashioned.
two pillars = the two pillars: i.e. the two notable pillars, for ornament, not for support, and hollow (Jer 52:21).
eighteen cubits high apiece. So 2Ki 25:17 and Jer 52:21. But 2Ch 3:15 (margin) says thirty-five cubits long: i.e. together, the top of “each” being reckoned separately. Therefore the height here was 17 + cubit being taken up in the joining on of the capital.
apiece. This is the reckoning here. In 2Ch 3:15 they are reckoned together. See margin.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
cast: Heb. fashioned
two pillars: 1Ki 7:21, 2Ki 25:16, 2Ki 25:17, 2Ch 3:15-17, 2Ch 4:12-22, Jer 52:21-23
eighteen cubits: That is, nearly thirty feet, English measure. But in the parallel place in Chronicles, these pillars are said to thirty-five cubits high. Tremellius reconciles this difference by observing, that the common cubit was but one-half of the cubit of the sanctuary; so that eighteen of the one would make thirty-six of the other; from which, if we deduct one cubit for the base, there will remain thirty-five. Notwithstanding the names of these pillars, they seem to have supported no part of the building, and appear to have been formed for ornament; and were no doubt also emblematical. The right pillar was called Jachin, which signifies, “He will establish;” while that on the left was named Boaz, “In it is strength.” Some think they were intended for memorials of the pillars and cloud of fire, which led Israel through the wilderness; but Henry supposes them designed for memorandums to the priests and others that came to worship at God’s door.
1st. To depend upon God only, and not upon any sufficiency of their own, for strength and establishment in all their religious exercises.
2nd. It was a memorandum to them of the strength and establishment of the temple of God among them.
When the temple was destroyed, particular notice is taken of the breaking up and carrying away of these brazen pillars, 2Ki 25:13, 2Ki 25:17, which had been the tokens of its establishment, and would have been still so, if they had not forsaken God.
Reciprocal: 1Ki 7:41 – two pillars 1Ch 18:8 – wherewith Jer 27:19 – the pillars Jer 52:17 – pillars Eze 40:49 – pillars Joh 6:13 – and filled
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ki 7:15-16. He cast two pillars of brass Of which see 2Ki 25:16-17; Jer 52:21. Of eighteen cubits high apiece It is said, 2Ch 3:15, that these pillars were thirty-five cubits high, which relates to the height of both of them together without their pedestals, whereas the height of each is given here with its pedestal. A line of twelve cubits did compass either of them The diameter, therefore, was four cubits, which, considering the chapiter of five cubits, added to the height of each pillar, (2Ch 3:15,) was only in due proportion to the height. In 2Ki 25:17, indeed, it is said, that the height of the chapiter was only three cubits. But it must be observed, that the word chapiter may either be taken more largely for the whole, in which case, it was five cubits; or more strictly, either for the pommels, as they are called, 2Ch 4:12; or for the cornice or crown, and so it was but three cubits, to which the pomegranates being added, made it four cubits, as it is 1Ki 7:19, and the other work upon it took up one cubit more, which in all made five cubits.